In the case of a project that was conceived decades ago and never happened and presumably nothing is being written about currently, I would say “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.”  If it’s a group one kind of heading, it doesn’t even need a qualifier because it’s done according to name authority rules.



John Hostage

Senior Continuing Resources Cataloger

Harvard Library--Information and Technical Services

Langdell Hall 194

Harvard Law School Library

Cambridge, MA 02138

[log in to unmask]

+(1)(617) 495-3974 (voice)

+(1)(617) 496-4409 (fax)
ISNI 0000 0000 4028 0917


From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ian Fairclough
Sent: Friday, December 08, 2017 11:30
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] PortAmerica


Dear PCCLIST ([log in to unmask]) readers,


Responding to Benjamin Abrahamse's contribution: With regard to H 405 Subject Headings Manual — Name vs. Subject Authority File — H 405 Establishing Certain Entities in the Name or Subject Authority File:


·         Projects, plans, etc. are in group 1


It's easy to miss " Projects, plans, etc " in the list, when what you're looking for is something resembling  real estate development. I didn't notice it before also finding that:


·         Housing projects are in group 1 

·         Apartment houses are in group 2


But bear in mind, PortAmerica doesn't exist, except as a plan or project.  So it definitely is authorized to be in group 1, and therefore established in the NAR, as it has been - correctly, in terms of these instructions.  My problem is not with whether or not a subject heading in LCSH should be used instead, but with the misleading qualifier, and there being no instruction to change it in such a case when the project doesn't happen.  


Thanks to Adam Schiff for saying that  the body to contact to get the instruction changed is the Standing Committee on Standards.  Has anyone on that committee taken note?  If not, then I must find how to contact them.  Ah, here's their web page  All I must do now is figure out whether I'm required to submit on some form or other which I don't see, or write directly to one of the committee members, most of whom appear to read PCCLIST and thus have already read about these concerns.  Of course, if none of those on the committee who are reading this thread think there's a problem here, then there's not much point in my pursuing the matter further. 


On a lighter note: A document about the National Harbor is now at my desk, and I look forward to dealing with it.  Many of you likely have seen the National Harborfront without knowing its name. If you fly into Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport and the pilot approaches up the Potomac River, it's on the right, directly before you fly over the Woodrow Wilson Bridge connecting the city of Alexandria with Prince George's County in Maryland.  A minute or so later and you're on the ground.  A magnificent sight!


Sincerely - Ian


Ian Fairclough

Cataloging and Metadata Services Librarian

George Mason University


[log in to unmask]